Instead of reading the store ourselves, we can just send them an
offset. This saves gossipd a lot of work, putting it where it belongs
(in the daemon responsible for the specific peer).
MCP bench results:
store_load_msec:28509-31001(29206.6+/-9.4e+02)
vsz_kb:580004-580016(580006+/-4.8)
store_rewrite_sec:11.640000-12.730000(11.908+/-0.41)
listnodes_sec:1.790000-1.880000(1.83+/-0.032)
listchannels_sec:21.180000-21.950000(21.476+/-0.27)
routing_sec:2.210000-11.160000(7.126+/-3.1)
peer_write_all_sec:36.270000-41.200000(38.168+/-1.9)
Signficant savings in streaming gossip:
-peer_write_all_sec:48.160000-51.480000(49.608+/-1.1)
+peer_write_all_sec:35.780000-37.980000(36.43+/-0.81)
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
I tried to just do gossipd, but it was uncontainable, so this ended up being
a complete sweep.
We didn't get much space saving in gossipd, even though we should save
24 bytes per node.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
As a side-effect of using amount_msat in gossipd/routing.c, we explicitly
handle overflows and don't need to pre-prune ridiculous-fee channels.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
This avoids some very ugly switch() statements which mixed the two,
but we also take the chance to rename 'towire_gossip_' to
'towire_gossipd_' for those inter-daemon messages; they're messages to
gossipd, not gossip messages.
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Rusty Russell